Mayra Ponce v. Medical Eyeglass Center Inc et al
Filing
25
ORDER RE: JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE by Judge Christina A. Snyder: Upon Stipulation 24 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the action and all of the claims alleged therein be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice, in their entirety and as to all current and former defendants, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a)(1). The Court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the Parties' confidential settlement agreement. ( Case Terminated. Made JS-6. ) (gk)
1 TODD H. HARRISON, SBN 230542
2
3
4
5
6
JS-6
BRENNAN S. KAHN, SBN 259548
PERONA, LANGER, BECK, SERBIN,
MENDOZA & HARRISON, APC.
300 East San Antonio Drive
Long Beach, California 90807-0948
(562) 426-6155 Fax (562) 490-9823
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Mayra Ponce
7
8
UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 MAYRA PONCE, an Individual,
Case Number: 2:15-cv-04035-CAS-JEM
12
(Assigned to Hon. Christina A. Snyder, U.S.
District Judge, and Hon. John E. McDermott,
Magistrate Judge, Courtroom 5, 2nd Floor (Los
Angeles – Spring Street))
Plaintiff,
13 vs.
14
MEDICAL EYEGLASS CENTER,
15 INC., a New Jersey Corporation; and
DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive,
16
17
Defendants.
18
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: JOINT
STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE
Complaint Filed:
Removed to Fed. Ct.:
19
April 16, 2015
May 28, 2015
20
21
22
Good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-
23 captioned action and all of the claims alleged therein be and hereby are dismissed with
24 prejudice, in their entirety and as to all current and former defendants, pursuant to Federal
25 Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a)(1). The Court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the
26 Parties’ confidential settlement agreement.
27 DATED: July 14, 2016
28
_____________________________
Hon. Christina A. Snyder, Judge
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER RE: JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL W/ PREJUDICE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?